[Authors and titles are included at the end of the review.]
There is no doubt that one of the most unexpected and intriguing archaeological discoveries in Rome in the last decades was made on the Palatine Hill by Françoise Villedieu and her team. The structure is distinguished by an unprecedented tower-like form, a very high circular substructure for a building which is not preserved. The structure revealed by the excavation is formed by concentric circular walls and is assigned to Nero’s Domus Aurea. Based on the text of Suetonius (Suet. Nero, 31) the structure has been interpreted as belonging to the famous cenatio rotunda, the hall that turned by night and day (“Praecipua cenationum rotunda, quae perpetuo diebus ac noctibus vice mundi circumageretur”[1]).
This volume, written in French and Italian, is a most welcome publication which offers the scientific community the information that emerged during three archaeological campaigns conducted between 2009 and 2015. The volume is edited by Françoise Villedieu, who also takes the lead in the volume for the description and the interpretation of the structures (a full list of authors and titles is listed at the end of this review). We have to be grateful to Villedieu for achieving the difficult and important task to make public the data of the excavation and the thorough description and careful analysis of the structures. Her remarkable expertise and knowledge of the site together with her capacity to read and interpret the stratigraphical sequence of this sector of the Palatine makes this publication a reference for any study to follow. The archaeological excavation is not only to be commended for the expertise with which it was conducted, but also to be praised for its timely publication, unlike many other earlier excavations in the area. The main contributors to the data presented in the volume, beyond the editor, are Nathalie André for architectural survey and reconstruction drawings, Marta Fedeli, Laura David and Giorgio Rizzo for the stratigraphy and pottery, Matilde Carrive for the painted plasters, Valeria Fontana for the coins, Marco Rossi for the architectural terracottas and Riccardo Montalbano for the fragments of architectural decoration.
Although the publication takes due account of all the phases of the site, discussed in the first part of the volume (pp.10-195), the main focus is on the Neronian building (pp. 199-370). The third part of the volume (pp. 373-446) is dedicated to more general topics dealing with the Neronian phase, and in particular with the cultural and ideological context which might have influenced the architecture of the building.
The structures discussed in the volume are located on the northeast edge of the Palatine, the so-called Vigna Barberini. The current topography is distinguished by a terrace towering above the arch of Constantine with a view towards the valley of the Colosseum and the Temple of Venus and Rome. The École française de Rome has conducted research in the Vigna Barberini for the last three decades, with important results in terms of the understanding of the topography and history of the site since antiquity. When Villedieu was asked to undertake the excavations published here she did not expect to find such an unusual and unique structure and was confronted with the interpretation of a construction largely compromised by the changes that occurred in the Flavian and Severan Periods.
The structure is composed of a cylindrical 3,85 m central pilaster on top of which eight arches radiate and bridge to a first ring wall (diameter 16 m ca.). At a lower level are other radiating arches, visible only from above, since the structure remains backfilled with demolition debris. At this level the landing of a spiral staircase is built into the core of the central pilaster, which has been excavated down to its foot, 15 m below. An annular corridor separates the first from the second ring wall, the latter only minimally preserved.
Clues that suggest the identification as the building described by Suetonius are the uniqueness of the structure and its circular form, which seems compatible with the rotating platform suggested in the volume. Particularly interesting is a corridor on the south side of the structure, where a quite impressive amount of metal bars were anchored into the concrete masonry. These bars might have been connected to a mechanism used to transfer the movement from a hydraulic system, as it is unlikely that they served to reinforce the masonry against tensile stresses. The most decisive and critical evidence given in support of the cenatio rotunda are some concave cavities on the top of the upper radiating arches which were found filled with silt. These cavities are interpretated as related to spherical rollers, removed with the demolition of the structure, while the silt is considered as a lubricant for the rollers. As discussed in Edoardo Gautier Di Confiengo’s contribution—which challenges to some extent the interpretation given by Villedieu—these randomly placed pits can hardly have hosted bronze ball bearings. I would add that the interpretation of silt as lubricant cannot be supported in any way. However, we have to give credit to the editor for having included in section VI two different models for the reconstruction of the mechanism, one by Matthieu with Daniel Gabay and the other by Gautier Di Confiengo. The three contributors engage with an exquisite hypothetical study on the mechanism that served the perpetual rotation of the platform. The hypothesis by Matthieu and Daniel Gabay is centered on a hydraulic mechanism which transferred the rotating movement through a system of vertical gears, with the platform supported by the bronze ball bearings. Gautier Di Confiengo’s proposal is instead based on horizontal gears transferring the movement to a platform floating in water, as to avoid friction. The first hypothesis remains more convincing, although the solution proposed is unlikely, as the rolling elements must have been part of a timber support laid on the walls. In general, the two contributions lack a more direct relationship with the actual remains and could have taken into account the detailed surveys of the building—, as for instance showing how the metal bars could have served the purpose of anchoring the mechanism or how the heavy structure could have been supported by rollers which were barely accessible for maintenance.
A detailed analysis of the Neronian masonry is related in chapters III and IV. The two sections are fundamental to getting the reader acquainted with the exceptionality of the construction, distinguished by an extremely hard and cohesive brick-faced concrete. Several inaccuracies in the execution of the structure detected by Villedieu highlight the rapidity in which works were conducted. The detailed descriptions offer the reader an extremely careful and in-depth analysis which helps to understand the particularity of the architectural program, but is also useful for framing the construction within the abilities and expertise of Roman Imperial builders in the mid 1st century AD. Because of the limited portion of the building excavated and the demolitions that subsequently took place in order to build the terrace there are many questions that remain open. Particularly intriguing is the interpretation offered regarding some open bonds left in the masonry (figs. 225, 227 and 228) which to my eyes suggest a construction which was never fully achieved. Future excavations might shed more light on these open bonds.
More details of the construction emerge in the chapter by Marta Fedeli, particularly focused on the use of bricks. The unusual dimension of the bricks is duly compared with those of the pavilion of the Golden House on the Oppian Hill, reinforcing the idea that the two constructions were realized at the same time. Particularly interesting are the letters (tituli picti) found on some bricks of the wall facing, giving more evidence for the practice of recording the completion of a day’s work, that has already been documented on several other buildings, such as the Baths of Trajan, built a few decades later[2].
The chapter dedicated to the hypothetical reconstruction is based on the assumption of the building’s function. It is a highly hypothetical exercise, which results in a purely conjectural reconstruction of the elevation of the building. The similarity between the dimension of the octagonal pavilion on the Oppian Hill and the diameter of the first ring wall, visualized in a very effective manner in fig. 303, points in favor of the circular room having been designed around a ceremonial setting centered on the emperor. This is a hypothesis which connects very well with the contribution of Pierre Gros who focuses on the role of dining rooms in imperial palaces as places where power was displayed. Gros’ text discusses the ways places designed to express the sacredness of power contributed to the perception of the emperor as someone above other human beings. At the same time Gros explains the term mundus, used in Suetonius’ text, as universe, reinforcing the hypothesis that the cenatio rotunda orchestrated the image of the emperor as the center of a cosmologic message, with himself placed at the center of the rotating platform, with everything and everyone turning around his figure.
Filippo Coarelli’s paper digs into the epigraphic sources to suggest the Alexandrine origin of the two architects of Nero, Severus and Celer. Their capacities as machinatores (“Nero usus est patriae ruinis extruxitque domus (…) magistris et machinatoribus Severo et Celere” Tac. Ann.,15,42,1) should thus be connected to the Alexandrine scientific School. In proposing that the Domus Aurea was influenced by models in the dynastic places of Alexandria, Coarelli reinforces the important role Alexandrine architecture played in Rome. Finally, in the last section of his paper Coarelli demonstrates that under Nero the Palatine was supplied from the Claudian aqueduct on the Caelian Hill through an inverted syphon. The water served the needs of the palace (see also the contribution of Maria Antonietta Tomei), including the water needed for the hydraulic mechanism of the cenatio rotunda.
Claudia Cecamore contributes to the volume with an analysis of the relationship between architecture and landscape, with the aim of identifying the process that brought painted architectures into real buildings. As discussed in her text, it was in the first half of the 1st c. CE that concepts found in Second Style painting were transferred into real architecture. Her meaningful observations highlight the degree to which luxury architectures aimed at placing the observer in privileged settings where architectural screens framed landscapes, just as in theatrical settings. At the same time, the review offered by Mathilde Carrive of painted landscapes with tower-like buildings also to the impact similar buildings might have had when seen from afar.
The images in the volume include pictures and drawings with a generous section of plates in color at the end of the volume. Throughout the volume images are abundant and support the description of the structures in the most effective and meaningful manner. Only in few sections the very detailed descriptions pose some difficulties to the reader when it comes to identifying the structures labelled with stratigraphic numbers. More generally, the unambiguous interpretation offered in the volume seems excessive, particularly in the light of an excavation covering a still limited sector of the building and the lack of any evidence for the elevation. A different approach, centred on an objective description of the evidence followed by the interpretation in a separate chapter, would have been beneficial to the discussion and would have offered to future studies more clues for alternative interpretations, including the possibility that this building was never completed.
Reaching the end of the book the reader is captured by a thought: how would these remains have been interpreted if the text of Suetonius had not described the rotating dining room? Literary sources are helpful, but can also be a trap if the evidence is scarce.
Authors and Titles
F. Villedieu, Les épisodes de la vie du site : interprétation de la séquence stratigraphique
M. Fedeli, L. David, G. Rizzo, M. Carrive, V. Fontana, M. Rossi, R. Montalbano, Studio dei materiali
F. Villedieu, N. André, L’édifice néronien : analyse des vestiges
M. Fedeli, L’opera testacea della costruzione neroniana
C. Devoto, Le monete della serie MAC AVG: una possibile raffigurazione della cenatio rotunda neroniana?
B. Spigola, Catalogo delle monete a legenda MAC AVG
M. Carrive, Comprendre l’architecture de la cenatio rotunda : l’iconographie antique comme source d’inspiration
M. Gabay, D. Gabay, Élaboration d’hypothèses sur le mécanisme hydraulique employé pour assurer la rotation de la salle à manger tournante du palais de Néron à Rome
E. Gautier Di Confiengo, La macchina della cenatio rotunda neroniana (Suet., nero, 31), ipotesi di ricostruzione
F. Villedieu, N. André, Propositions pour une restitution de l’édifice et de son environnement
M.A. Tomei, Palatino. Nota sull’approvvigionamento idrico del palazzo imperiale da Augusto a Nerone
M.A. Tomei, Le costruzioni neroniane sul Palatino
P. Gros, Vice mundi. L’astronomie au service du pouvoir
F. Coarelli, La praecipua cenationum rotunda
C. Cecamore, Lo spazio conquistato. Interni e paesaggio: il ruolo dell’architettura neroniana
Notes
[1] “the principal dining room was circular and revolved perpetually, night and day, as the universe” (trad. P. Vitti). The sentence is cited obsessively throughout the text by all the authors.
[2] Volpe R., Rossi F.M., Nuovi dati sull’esedra sud-ovest delle terme di Traiano sul colle oppio: percorsi, iscrizioni dipinte e tempi di costruzione, in S. Camporeale, H. Dessales, A. Pizzo (eds.), Arqueología de la construcción. III. Los procesos constructivos en el mundo romano: la economia de las obras, Madrid-Merida, 2012, 69-81.